Spanish Fork City v. Hopper
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the district court of the first district and from an order overruling- a motion for a new trial. The opinion states the facts, except that the demurrer was on three grounds; incapacity of the plaintiff, Spanish Fork City, to sue; ambiguity and uncertainty in the complaint, and that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
1Opinion of the Court
Miner, J.:
This action was commenced by the plaintiffs against the defendants in the first district court at Provo, June 4, 1889, to prevent and restrain the defendants from taking, diverting, or obstructing any of the waters of the Spanish Fork river or its tributaries in Utah county; plaintiffs claiming to be joint owners by prior appropriation and use of the waters of said river for irrigation and domestic purposes. The several separate answers of the defendants were filed June 15, 1889, and a joint demurrer filed May 9, 1890, was overruled May 13, 1890, and the court proceeded to try the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Carpentier v. WebsterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Caulfield v. SandersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Lytle Creek Water Co. v. PerdewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Howell v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Table Mountain Tunnel Co. v. StranahanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
3Cited by7 opinions
- Thomas v. GlendinningUtah Supreme Court · 1896
- Fullerton v. BaileyUtah Supreme Court · 1898
- Rodgers v. PittU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1904
- Henderson v. TurngrenUtah Supreme Court · 1894
- Nelden-Judson Drug Co. v. Commercial National Bank of OgdenUtah Supreme Court · 1903
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.